Disaster Risk Reduction: From Integrated Research to Effective Risk Management
International Workshop on Governance of Climate-related Risks in Europe: the need for policy-oriented research Brussels, 8-9 September 2011
Sálvano Briceño Chair-elect, Science Committee, IRDR
1 Natural catastrophes worldwide 1980 – 2010 Number of events with trend Number
Geophysical events Meteorological events Hydrological events Climatological events (Earthquake, tsunami, (Storm) (Flood, mass (Extreme temperature, volcanic eruption) movement) drought, forest fire)
© 2011 Münchener Rückversicherungs Gesellschaft, Geo Risks Research, NatCatSERVICE – As at January 2011 Natural catastrophes worldwide 1 980 – 2010 Overall and insured losses with trend (bn US$)
Overall losses (in 2010 values) Insured losses (in 2010 values)
Trend overall losses Trend insured losses
© 2011 Münchener Rückversicherungs Gesellschaft, Geo Risks Research, NatCatSERVICE – As at January 2011 Significant natural catastrophes worldwide 1980 – 2010 10 costliest natural catastrophes ordered by overall losses
Overall losses Insured losses Period Event Affected Area Fatalities US$ m, original values
25 30.8.2005 Hurricane Katrina USA: LA, New Orleans,Slidell; MS, Biloxi, 125,000 62,200 1,300 Pascagoula, Waveland, Gulfport 17.1.1995 Earthquake Japan: Hyogo, Kobe, Osaka, Kyoto 100,000 3,000 6,400
12.5.2008 Earthquake China: Sichuan, Mianyang, an,Beichu Wenchuan, 85,000 300 84,000 Shifang, Chengdu, Guangyuan, Ngawa, Ya'an 17.1.1994 Earthquake USA: Northridge, Los Angeles,n Fernando Sa 44,000 15,300 60 Valley, Ventura, Orange 6 14.9.2008 Hurricane Ike USA. Cuba. Haiti. Dominican Republic. Turks and 38,300 18,500 170 Caicos Islands. Bahamas May September Floods China: Jangtsekiang, Songhua Jiang 30,700 1,000 4,200 1998 27.2.2010 Earthquake, tsunami Chile: Bio Bio, Concepción, Talcahuano, Coronel, 30,000 8,000 520 Dichato, Chillán; Del Maule, Talca, Curicó 23.10.2004 Earthquakes Japan: Honshu, Niigata, Tokyo,Ojiya, Nagaoka, 28,000 760 50 Yamakoshi 23 27.8.1992 Hurricane Andrew USA: FL, Homestead; Bahamas LA. 26,500 17,000 60
27.6 13.8.1996 Floods China: Guizhou, esp. Guiyang;hejiang; Z Sichuan; 24,000 445 3,050 Hunan; Anhui; Jiangxi; Hubei; Guangxi; Jiangsu
© 2011 Münchener Rückversicherungs Gesellschaft, Geo Risks Research, NatCatSERVICE – As at January 2011 Significant natural catastrophes worldwide 1980 – 2010 10 costliest natural catastrophes ordered by insured losses
Overall losses Insured losses Period Event Affected Area Fatalities US$ m, original values
25 30.8.2005 Hurricane Katrina USA: LA, NewSlidell; Orleans, MS, Biloxi, 125,000 62,200 1,300 Pascagoula, Waveland, Gulfport 6 14.9.2008 Hurricane Ike USA. Cuba. Haiti. Republic. Dominican Turks and 38,300 18,500 170 Caicos Islands. Bahamas 23 27.8.1992 Hurricane Andrew USA: FL, Homestead; Bahamas LA. 26,500 17,000 60
17.1.1994 Earthquake USA: Northridge, Losn FernandoAngeles, Sa 44,000 15,300 60 Valley, Ventura, Orange 7 21.9.2004 Hurricane Ivan USA. Trinidad Venezuela.and Tobago. Colombia. 23,000 13,800 130 Mexico 19 24.10.2005 Hurricane Wilma USA. Bahamas.ti. Jamaica.Cuba. Hai Mexico 22,000 12,500 40
20 24.9.2005 Hurricane Rita USA: LA, Lakelly Charles, Beach, HoCameron, 16,000 12,100 10 New Orleans; MS; TX, Houston 27.2.2010 Earthquake, tsunami Chile: Bio Bio,ión, Concepc Talcahuano, Coronel, 30,000 8,000 520 Dichato, Chillán; Del Maule, Talca, Curicó 11 14.8.2004 Hurricane Charley USA. Cuba. ymanJamaica. Islands Ca 18,000 8,000 40
26 28.9.1991 Typhoon Mireille,Japan: Kyushu, Hokkaido, Hakata 10,000 7,000 60 floods
© 2011 Münchener Rückversicherungs Gesellschaft, Geo Risks Research, NatCatSERVICE – As at January 2011 Significant natural catastrophes worldwide 1980 – 2010 10 deadliest events
Overall losses Insured losses Period Event Affected Area Fatalities US$ m, original values
12.1.2010 Earthquake Haiti: Port au Prince,le Petionvil 8,000 200 222,570
26.12.2004 Earthquake, tsunami Sri Lanka. Indonesia.Thailand. India. Bangladesh. 10,000 1,000 220,000 Myanmar. Malediven. Malaysia 2 5.5.2008 Cyclon Nargis Myanmar: Ayeyawaddy, Bugalay, Yangon, 4,000 140,000 Irrawaddy, Bago, Karen, Mon, Laputta, Haing Kyi 29 30.4.1991 Tropical cyclon Bangladesh: Bay l,of Cox's Benga Bazar, 3,000 100 139,000 Chittagong, Bola, Noakhali districts, esp. Kutubdia 8.10.2005 Earthquake Pakistan. India. Afghanistan 5,200 5 88,000
12.5.2008 Earthquake China: Sichuan, Mianyang,an, BeichuWenchuan, 85,000 300 84,000 Shifang, Chengdu, Guangyuan, Ngawa, Ya'an July August 2003 Heatwave, drought France. Germany.taly. Portugal. I Romania. Spain. 13,800 20 70,000 United Kingdom July Sept. 2010 Heatwave, drought Russia 2,000 20 56,000
21.6.1990 Earthquake Iran: Caspian Sea, Gilan, Manjil, Provinz Rudbar, 7,100 100 40,000 Zanjan, Safid, Qazvin 8 19.12.1999 Floods, flash floods Venezuela: Vargas,La Guaira Punta de Mulatos, 3,200 220 30,000 Miranda, Nueva Esparta, Yaracuy. Kolumbien
© 2011 Münchener Rückversicherungs Gesellschaft, Geo Risks Research, NatCatSERVICE – As at January 2011 Global Trends Disasters are NOT natural
Greater exposure to natural and human induced hazards, climate change and HAZARDS + variability EXTREME EVENTS
Socio economic: poverty & unsustainable development styles, unplanned urban growth and migrations, lack of risk awareness & risk governance institutions & accountability...
Physical: insufficient land use planning, housing & critical infrastructure in hazard VULNERABILITY prone areas, little safety awareness...
Ecosystem & natural resource depletion (coastal, mountains, watersheds, wetlands, forests ) World Conference on Disaster Reduction 2nd WCDR, Kobe, Hyogo, Japan, 18 22 January 2005
Hyogo Framework for Action 2005-2015: Building the resilience of nations and communities to disasters (HFA)
3 Strategic goals 5 Priorities for action Implementation and follow up
Expected outcome:
The WCDR resolved to pursue the following expected outcome for the next 10 years: the substantial reduction of disaster losses, in lives & in the social, economic & environmental assets of communities & countries . The realization of this outcome will require the full commitment & involvement of all actors concerned, including governments, regional & international organizations, civil society including volunteers, the private sector & the scientific community. Hyogo Framework for Action 2005-2015 (continued)
3 strategic goals:
The integration of disaster risk reduction into sustainable development policies & planning
The development & strengthening of institutions, mechanisms & capacities to build resilience to hazards
The systematic incorporation of risk reduction approaches into the implementation of emergency preparedness, response & recovery programmes Hyogo Framework for Action 2005 2015 (continued) Five priorities for action: 1. Governance: ensure that disaster risk reduction is a national and local priority with strong institutional basis for implementation
2. Risk identification: identify, assess and monitor disaster risks and enhance early warning
3. Knowledge: use knowledge, innovation and education to build a culture of safety and resilience at all levels
4. Reducing the underlying risk factors in various sectors (environment, health, construction, private sector etc.)
5. Strengthen disaster preparedness for effective response Key questions: • Why, despite advances in the natural and social science of hazards and disasters, do losses continue to increase?
• To what extent is the world-wide growth in disaster losses a symptom and indicator of unsustainable development? Partners Co-Sponsors • National and international science institutions • National and international development assistance agencies and funding bodies • National Committees
12 The Science Plan Addressing the challenge of natural and human-induced environmental hazards
An integrated approach to research on disaster risk through: an international, multidisciplinary (natural, health, engineering and social sciences, including socio- economic analysis) collaborative research programme.
IRDR Science Plan at: http://www.irdrinternational.org/ 13 Scope of IRDR • Geophysical, climate and weather-related trigger events
• Earthquakes – tsunamis – volcanoes – floods – storms (hurricanes, cyclones, typhoons) – heat waves – droughts – wild-fires – landslides – coastal erosion – climate change (increases of extreme events) • Effects of human activities on creating or enhancing disasters, including land-use practices • Space weather and impact by near-Earth objects • NOT disasters triggered by technological failure (but technological failure triggered by geophysical and climate-weather events), warfare…
14 Objective-1:
Characterization of hazards, vulnerability and risk – 1.1: identifying hazards and vulnerabilities leading to risks; – 1.2: forecasting hazards and assessing risks; and – 1.3: dynamic modelling of risk – HFA-2. Identify, assess and monitor disaster risks and enhance early warning Objective 2: Effective decision making in complex and changing risk contexts – 2.1: Identifying relevant decision-making systems and their interactions – 2.2: Understanding decision making in the context of environmental hazards; and – 2.3: Improving the quality of decision-making practice – HFA-1. DRR-national priority – HFA-5. Strengthen disaster preparedness Objective 3:
Reducing risk and curbing losses through knowledge-based actions – 3.1: Vulnerability assessments; – 3.2: Effective approaches to risk reduction – Long-term database, monitoring systems and tools – HFA-4. Reduce the underlying risk factors – HFA-3. knowledge - culture of safety and resilience Cross-Cutting Themes 1. Capacity building 2. Case studies and demonstration projects 3. Assessment, data management and monitoring • HFA-2. Identify, assess and monitor disaster risks • HFA-1, -HFA-3,- HFA-4, HFA-5…
1. . IPCC Special Report on Managing Risk of Extreme Climate Events ICSU-WMO-IOC/Unesco - WMO - World Weather World Climate Research Research Program Socio- Program Storms, floods Economic Climate extremes Research Activities •UNESCO-IOC-Tsunami risk
ICSU IRDR ICSU-ISSC-UNU •Regional Programs International Human •IUGG-ENHANS Dimensions Program •CODATA Integrated Risk Governance Land-Ocean Interactions in FORIN Coastal Zone Risk Interpretation and Action (RIA) • What do people (especially • Consideration of social those at risk) think is likely and behavioral factors to happen? & What will they that place the local do about it? population at greater or • Estimation of the likelihood lesser risk and magnitude • Evaluation of the vulnerability/resilience of the physical infrastructure
20 IRDR Forensic Disaster Investigations (FORIN) • Probe further into complex and underlying causes of growing disaster loss • Fundamental cause of disasters • Trace out and assign causal explanation of losses • Intervening conditions that increased or reduce losses
• Series of case studies • Common template and methodology
21 • Disaster Loss Data Project (DATA) • ... need for more systematic and reliable information on such events. ... generate new information and data and to leave a legacy of coordinated and integrated global data and information sets across hazards and disciplines, with unprecedented degrees of access • Assessment of Integrated Research on Disaster Risk (AIRDR) • First systematic and critical assessment of research on disaster risk, provide baseline to measure effectiveness of multiple programmes Sponsors: ICSU, ISSC, UN-ISDR
Consultative Forum IPO Scientific Committee OLIVER-SMITH, Anthony, University of Florida, BENOUAR, Djillali, Professor University of UNUSA ISDR Global Platform Dr. Jane E. Rovins, Executive Director Science & Technology , Algeria PELLING, Mark, King’s College, London, UK Lang Lang, Administrative Officer Geneva, June 2011 (2013, 2015, …) BRICENO, Salvano, Geneva, Switzerland PATEK, Maria, Vienna, Austria Anna Rudashko, Communications CARDONA, Omar Darío, National University of SIWAR, Chamhuri, Emeritus Professor and Vacant, Science Officer Pacific Science Congress - Kuala Colombia, Manizales, Colombia Principal Research Fellow, Malaysia … Lumpur, June 2011 CHAN Kin Sek, Raymond, Civil Engineering and TAKEUCHI, Kuniyoshi, ICHARM, Japan Located at CEODE, CAS, Beijing, China Development Department of Hong Kong, VOGEL, Coleen, University of the China ICSUWitswatersrand, GA, Rome, South September, Africa – 2011 CUTTER, Susan, University of South Carolina, WIRTZ, Angelika, Geo Risks Research, Munich Re, USA IRDRGermany Conference EISER, Richard, University of Sheffield, UK – Ex-Officio:Beijing , October /November 2011 FERRIGNI Ferrucio, Naples, Italy GUO, Huadong, Center for Earth Observation and Digital Earth(CEODE), CAS, Beijing JOHNSTON, David, Massey University, New HERNES,Planet Gudmund, Under Pressure International Social Science Zealand London,Council (ISSC) March 2012 LAVELL, Allan, FLACSO, Costa Rica MASKREY, Andrew, UN International Strategy for McBEAN, Gordon, University of Western Disaster Reduction (UNISDR) Ontario, Canada – CHAIR MOORE,… Howard, International Council for Science (ICSU) 23 Sponsors: ICSU, ISSC, Collaborating UN-ISDR Organizations: UNESCO WMO Consultative … Forum IPO Scientific Committee Scientific Steering Groups InternationalCentresExcellence of
Regional Programmes Partners in research: National National Committees
Working Group-Task building Capacity • Unions and National Teams: Members of ICSU, • FORIN Unions of ISSC • RIA • IUGG – ENHANS • Long-term database and •CoDATA Monitoring systems and • WWRP tools Canada • WCRP- Extremes • Socio-economic research • IHDP-IRG activity China •IHDP-IGBP-LOICZ France • ICL Germany ICSU- ROAP • Int. Floods Initiative • IOC tsunami prog. Japan • … 24 IRDR Legacy
• An enhanced capacity around the world to address hazards and make informed decisions on actions to reduce their impacts. • • Societies to shift focus from response- recovery towards prevention-mitigation, building resilience and reducing risks, learning from experience and avoiding past mistakes. Registration and Abstract Submission Open Global Earthquake Model
Uniform and Open Standards to Calculate and Communicate Earthquake Risk THE NEED
Seismic risk mitigation requires accurate, consensual and uniform risk estimates.
Since strong earthquakes know no political boundaries and occur relatively rarely, a global knowledge-sharing approach is required, which should lead also to the development of socio-economic impact assessment tools, including cost-benefit analysis, involving both the public and the private sectors, as well as international organisations, professionals associations and the wider community.. THE GLOBAL EARTHQUAKE MODEL
“A collaborative effort devised and launched by the OECD Global Science Forum, aimed at engaging the global community in the design, development and deployment of uniform open standards and tools for earthquake risk assessment worldwide” PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP
7 private organisations have they contribute 9 countries have partnered up with GEM so far 13.6 M Euro adhered so far
discussions and the OECD, WorldBank, UNESCO, UN/ISDR, negotiations are ongoing IAEE and IASPEI are associative participants with 15+ others PRIVATE PARTICIPANTS
Founders:
5 Mill. € 1 Mill. €
1 Mill. € 3 Mill. €
1.6 Mill. €
Sponsors:
1 Mill. € 1 Mill. € PUBLIC PARTICIPANTS
Australia Belgium Germany Italy New Zealand
Norway Singapore Switzerland Turkey United Kingdom ASSOCIATE PARTICIPANTS
OECD Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development
WORLD BANK The World Bank
UN-ISDR United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Risk Reduction
UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
IASPEI International Association of Seismology and Physics of the Earth’s Interior
IAEE International Association of Earthquake Engineering GLOBAL COMPONENTS
For and from the community..
scientific modules of GEM that are developed at a global scale to provide standards, methods and tools for global datasets addressed by international consortia that respond to Requests for Proposals (RfPs) released periodically by the Scientific Board before consortia are selected there is a thorough process of expert elicitation, community feedback, and peer review provide the global framework for the model which will be reviewed and further developed by the Regional Programmes to ensure they are adequate for regional needs and characteristics GEM1
Pilot project to generate GEM’s first products and develop GEM’s initial infrastructure HAZARD GLOBAL COMPONENTS
Expert elicitation, 5 Request for Proposals (RfP) drafting and publication International consortia submitted 9 proposals (20+ Institutions ) 14 peer reviewers, Scientific Board selection, Governing Board decision.
Global Earthquake History Global Instrumental Earthquake Catalogue Global Active Fault and Seismic Source Database Global Ground-Motion Prediction Equations Global Geodetic Strain Rate Model RISK GLOBAL COMPONENTS
Expert elicitation, 5 Requests for Proposals (RfP) drafting, community feedback, RfP review and publication International consortia submitted 14 proposals (60+ Institutions ) 20 peer reviewers, Scientific Board selection, Governing Board decision.
GEM Ontology and Taxonomy Global Exposure Database Global Earthquake Consequences Database Global Vulnerability Estimation Methods Inventory Data Capture Tools SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPACT GLOBAL COMPONENT
Expert elicitation, 7 workshops and meetings, 1 Request for Proposal (RfP) drafting, community feedback, RfP review and publication International consortia submitted 3 proposals (20+ institutions ) 7 peer reviewers, Scientific Board selection, Governing Board decision. OPENGEM DEVELOPMENT 2011-2013
Interaction between the OpenQuake calculation software, the OpenGEM risk assessment platform, the Regional Programmes and Global Components for the development of the GEM model SERVING USERS & BENEFICIARIES
National, Regional and Local (city) Engineers and Governments building institutions
Research institutions Disaster Management and Risk organisations / initiatives • earthquake/civil engineering • seismology • economcis • social sciences Private industry • environmental/ sustainability • (human) geography - urban planning GEM • Insurance • IT • Banking • development studies • Utilities, Energy • Construction • Leisure/tourism individuals in earthquake • Consultancy prone areas • IT and technology NGOs and civil society organizations Media • online Intergovernmental / • offline other international organisations CONCLUDING: MAIN FEATURES
…of a Global Earthquake Risk Model It must consist of a state-of-the-art, independent, transparent/open and consistent standard/model to calculate earthquake risk
It must be dynamic, modular, flexible, expandable (i.e. not a map nor a report)
It should serve the needs of all possible users, from the general public to the decision makers, communicating risk in an effective manner
It must stem from a public-private partnership, combining the strengths (and objectives) of both the public and the private sectors
It needs to be community-based and public-owned, in order to be consensual, accepted and actually used
It has to feature regional and global coverage and facilitate technology-transfer FURTHER INFORMATION
GEM Website Most update source of information News, results, calls, …
GEM Report 2009/2010 36 pages Available from website and hard-copy
Bi-monthly e-Newsletter Sign-up at website
GEM Handout Available from website and hard-copy Thank you www.irdrinternational.org
43